Bio-Leninism

Film maker and author (Puzzling People, The Druid Code and Walpurgis Night) Thomas Sheridan summarised the concept of Bio-Leninism on his Substack recently.

Coined by Spandrell, the concept refers to a political logic by which faltering or hostile regimes abandon competent, independent men in favour of a coalition drawn from the biologically unfit. Those who lack the physical, mental, or moral qualities that sustain natural hierarchy.

Such individuals are not elevated for their excellence, but because their loyalty can be guaranteed through weakness, and thus through dependency.

Lacking the capacity to endure outside the broken order of the present, they attach themselves to its survival and become its most fanatical defenders.

This is not a novel phenomenon.

In the Soviet Union, Lenin assembled his revolutionary vanguard from the resentful margins of society, the “spiteful mutants”: ethnic minorities, failed intellectuals, disaffected malcontents, and social deviants.

These were not the aristocrats, farmers, or craftsmen who sustained tradition and order, but the dislocated, the embittered, and the dependent. They were the perfect material for a regime that offered neither future nor excellence, only an ideology sustained by the resentment and revenge of the degenerate.

Bio-leninism draws upon the same political logic — rule through the loyalty of the dependent — but adapts it to the conditions of modern liberalism.

Where classical Leninism weaponised class resentment to mobilise the disaffected margins of a collapsing empire, Bio-leninism expands the formula to encompass the full spectrum of modern dysfunction. 

It assembles its coalition from the sexually deviant, the mentally unstable, the chronically aggrieved, and the racially embittered. The uglier, weaker, and more broken the individual, the more useful he becomes.

His inability to succeed on merit ensures his total loyalty. His only path to status, wealth, and power lies through the favour of the regime. And the regime, in turn, uses this loyalty to suppress those who pose a threat: men of strength, beauty, pedigree, or competence.

In this arrangement, merit in the true sense, ability evidenced by capacity, is not suppressed by accident; it is suppressed by design.

The system cannot afford excellence, properly understood as effectiveness, because excellence breeds independence.

It cannot tolerate beauty, because beauty affirms natural hierarchy.

It cannot allow normalcy, because normal people do not require constant management. Instead, it must elevate the dependent and the deviant, so that power may be exercised without challenge or criticism.

This is why the modern West is governed not by its best, but by its worst.

The administrators of the present age do not aspire to glory or greatness; they seek only compliance. They do not rule through virtue, but through fear, distortion and the calculated erosion of order. Their stability rests upon the loyalty of those who would be powerless in any natural or just world.

Bio-leninism is not a symptom. It is the governing logic of a regime that can no longer sustain itself through excellence, and must instead survive through entropy.

Thomas Sheridan writes on Substack and video posts.